Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the id-vs-query mode split, which the schema already documents in the id parameter description; there is no mention of pagination behavior, result shape, or permissions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single efficient sentence with the resource and the two modes front-loaded. It is not padded, though its brevity leaves useful details unstated rather than being maximally informative.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 6-parameter query tool with a nested MongoDB-style query object, no output schema, and minimal annotations, the description is adequate but thin. It does not compensate for the undocumented fields parameter or clarify return/pagination behavior, leaving the schema to do most of the work.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 83%, so the schema already carries most parameter meaning (skip, sort, limit, query example). The description mentions id and query but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, and does not cover the undocumented fields projection parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb (Find) and resource (LimVidShare records), and distinguishes the two retrieval modes (single by id vs. filtered list). It does not explain what a LimVidShare is or differentiate this resource from the many sibling query_lim* tools beyond the resource name itself.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explains the intra-tool mode choice (pass id for one record, query for a filtered list), which is useful. But it gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings like query_limvidvideo or query_limvidcomment, and no prerequisites or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.